About your Search

20120901
20120930
STATION
CSPAN 22
CSPAN2 11
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
LANGUAGE
English 34
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)
.s. person in a data pool emassed lawfully under section 702 of fisa, unless the searching official has a warrant. now, the fisa amendments act of 2008 does not make clear that the government must obtain a
in history, the government must obtain an individualized court order from the fisa court to target americans outside the united states. foreign surveillance, under the fisa amendments act, is subject to extensive oversight by the administration and congress. every 60 days, justice department, national security officials and the director of national intelligence conduct
americans. the annual certification procedures provided under the fisa amendment act does not allow the targeting of americans outside the united states. thus if an american is targeted anywhere in the world or if a person is targeted within the united states an individualized court order is required. in cases involving a foreign terrorist outside the united states, the foreign intelligence
now, the fisa amendments act of 2008 does not make clear that the government must obtain a warrant prior to searching for information acquired incidentally on a u.s. person in a large pool of data that the government has already lawfully obtained under section 702 should such a data pool happen. the information about such person is subject to
right. if the fisa court is just a rubber stamp of the executive branch, we and the public should know that. and if the court really does provide meaningful oversight and meaningful limitations on the executive branch, we and the public should know that too. but we won't get to discover that or to debate. that failure to do so is a dereliction of our constitutional duty to protect the constitutional rights of american citizens and the betrayal of our liberties. i urge my colleagues to row ject this legislation -- reject this legislation and demand that we
in the united states without an individualized court order from a fisa judge. the government cannot reverse target individuals overseas in order to monitor those in the united states. this means that the government cannot target a u.s. person simply by monitoring a non-u.s.
restraints congress put on fisa have been violated. we should address those abuses. congress has an obligation to exert more control over spy agencies than simply to give them a blank check for another five years. the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, had an amendment that would have shortened the sunset by two years. but we won't even have a chance to consider it. perhaps because some of our republican colleagues might also want to support such an amendment.
to house resolution 773, i call up h.r. 5949, the fisa amendments act re-authorization act of 2012, as amended, and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 463, h.r. 5959, a bill to extend the fisa amendments act of 2008 for five years. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 773, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on the judiciary printed in the bill is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered as read. the bill shall be debatable for one hour with 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary and 20 minutes controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. rogers, and the gentleman from maryland, mr. ruppersberger, each will control 10 minutes. the chair recogn
voted today to renew the foreign intelligence surveillance act known as fisa for five years. the law allows the government to conduct wireless hacking of international phone conversations. here's the house debate today on the hill. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. smith: pursuant to house resolution 773, i call up h.r. 5949, the fisa amendments act re-authorization act of 2012, as amended, and ask for its mediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 463, h.r. 5959, a bill to extend the fisa amendments act of 2008 for five years. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 773, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on the judiciary printed in the bill is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered as read. the bill shall be debatable for e hour with 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the mmittee on the judiciary and 20 mutes controlled by the chai
of the presidential debates. live on c-span. watch and engage. next, the house on fisa. the head of the consumer financial protection bureau was named director of the bureau in january. you can watch him live on c- span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. >> 95,000 -- almost 400,000 people dropped out of the work force altogether. it is on a national. >> after producing -- after losing around a hundred thousand when i got intot office, we have produced more jobs. >> domestic policy, including jobs, will be the topic of the first debate. foreign policy will be the focus of the final debate, monday, the 22nd. through election day, we will cover key house and senate. follow us live on c-span t.org. >> i like "washington journal." it may be the last version of unfiltered news on the air. "washington journal" is good because i like the range of questions the hostess asked and the inclusion of callers. i am baffled that other networks do not take your example. it is a wonderful program. when you cover congress, that is unfiltered terrorism. that is telling you exactly what happened. great channel. >> joe pa
it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 5949, to extend the fisa amendments acked of 2008 for five years. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on the judiciary now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. the bill as amended shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill as amended are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill as amended and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate with 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary. and 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. and two, one motion to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one hour. america online madam speaker, for the purpose of debate o
generational. it is a standing case relating to a challenge to what is called the fisa amendment act. the fisa amendment act was passed in 2008 and it was an amendment, very substantial mimic of the foreign intelligence surveillance act passed in 1978 and understand the standing issue, you have to understand the merits a little bit. >> for those watching on c-span what is standing? >> standing is the question of whether a party actually has the right to appear in court and to challenge in this case to challenge the statute. just to get ahead of things, the plaintiffs here are attorneys, civil rights activists and others who are in regular contact with people overseas particularly people who might well be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government and they are challenging the law that allows electronic surveillance, this wiretapping because they're concerned that their case will be picked up. they're claiming to have standing to challenge this law because even though the surveillance might be directed overseas to people they're talking to get their dedication will get pick
cases. clapper vs. amnesty international, a standing case related to a challenge of the fisa amendments act. fisa was passed to a dozen a, an amendment of the foreign intelligence surveillance act passed in 1978. you have to understand the merits of little bit. >> for those watching on c-span, what is standing? >> whether a party has a right to appear in court and challenge the statutes. the plaintiffs are attorneys, human rights activists, and others who are in regular contact with people overseas, people who might be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government, and they are challenging the law that allows this because they are concerned their communications will be picked up. they claim they have standing to challenge the law, their communications will get picked up, and in the course of that surveillance, they have the right to challenge that in court. that is the standing issue. to get to the merits, fisa passed in 1978 and the aftermath about abuses, it set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court in d.c. and get permission when t
to a challenge of the fisa amendments act. fisa was passed in 2008, an amendment of the foreign intelligence surveillance act that was passed in 1978. you have to understand the merits of little bit. >> for those watching on c-span, what is standing? >> whether a party has a right to appear in court and challenge the statutes. the plaintiffs are attorneys, human rights activists, and others who are in regular contact with people overseas, people who might be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government, and they are challenging the law that allows this because they are concerned their communications will be picked up. they claim they have standing to challenge the law, their communications will get picked up, and in the course of that surveillance, they have the right to challenge that in court. that is the standing issue. to get to the merits, fisa passed in 1978, and in the aftermath about abuses, it set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purposes. th
to extend a separate statute allowing warrantless government surveillance. with the fisa amendments act set to expire the end of 2012, the house voted wednesday to extend it for five years. democratic congressmember jerrold nadler of new york criticized the measure. >> want is a proper for the government to gather foreign intelligence and while some degree of secrecy is necessary, it is also vital in a free society with a much government, protect the constitutional rights of americans here and abroad, and limit or less spying to genuine intelligence. we've seen repeatedly how even the minimal restraint congress put on fisa violated. we should address those abuses. congress has an obligation to exert more control over spy agencies than simply to give them a blank check for another five years. >> public school teachers in chicago are continuing their historic strike for a fourth day. wednesday, thousands of teachers and supporters rallied outside three local schools and it's the protest union leaders and school officials appeared to be making progress toward an agreement that would in the str
we were concerned about. if fisa comes up, it will be a great debate on the senate side. we are not giving them free rein to do whatever they want. host: do you think the democratic leaders will bring that to the floor? guest: there is a split in the caucus. we know the white house and others are trying to figure of how to get through this maze, but there is a concern of how far you go. maybe the votes are not there. also, cybersecurity came up a couple of months ago, and then it went off the radar screen. people realize we have to deal with cybersecurity. no question about that, but how far do you go? there are enough of us, especially the democrats from western states, that have a different view of privacy rights. in alaska, we consider ourselves more libertarian with these issues. the right to privacy is imbedded in our convert -- constitution. vermont is the only other state that has that. sometimes we get very excited. i mention these committee hearings. we read an incident about something dramatic that happened, and then we go crazy and we go way overboard. what do we
. >> host: reauthorize and fisa, the 1978 law that allows the u.s. intelligence agencies to conduct physical and electronic surveillance. they said that the bill traveling in the senate in the democratic caucus. what about on the house? do you have reservations? >> guest: of course. remember we are talking about the amendment act. when it passed in 2008, the democrats controlled congress, and it got about 300 votes in the house. the reauthorization queen, just like it is from past the intelligence committee 17 to nothing to it succumbing you know, this is one of the -- the obama administration says just renew it. don't play games with it. and so, it is somewhat discouraging to me that they seem to be playing some games. we have such overwhelming bipartisan support in the past as well as oversight especially in the intelligence community and the house we can at least get that done. we are going to vote on it this week in the house. so the question is what happens in the senate, and that is where i say they don't play games with it because again, our intelligence and law enforcement profession
in the jttf and see where the suspicious activity or where there is a fisa intercepted import and having the case is managed by the fbi headquarters that in coordination with dhs starts to look like a system specializing on borders using their collection resources, i.c.e. and customs border protection. they stayed at the beginning of the questions try to avoid this happening in the future. as budgets go down, weaving this together will be more difficult. absolutely the technology exists today to make sure some of those less understandable correlations are seen at both the state level wind the local legal left of the federal level for some of these cases among the top rarities in having that occur? >> i agree that is the first of the information technology. islamic the ranking member from south carolina mr. duncan is recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman, thanks for this very timely hearing. the had 48 hours in advance of the 9/11 attacks that happened this week yet they did not been locked in a certain embassies for the threats were there are clear signals staring us in the face and we f
procedures mandated by the fisa amendment. it is an interesting case, but not a big ticket case. i suppose one could infer from the fact that the court has not waded into the cases that the supreme court is generally comfortable with the way the d.c. circuit has handled those issues. again, that is an inference from silence because we do not have any indication of whether the supreme court is, in fact, comfortable. >> how about a hand for our panel. [laughter] [applause] please stay in your seats for the simon lecture. >> now, we will continue the discussion on the supreme court with former solicitor general and lead attorney argument against the health care law, paul clement. he outlines the case's path to the court, how it was argued in court, and his surprise in the court's decision. also from the cato institute, this is just over one hour. >> i want to welcome those of you who just joined us for the simon lecture. i am walt -- roger pilon. i want to welcome those in the c-span audience, who might have just joined us for this sign and lecture. each year, we conclude our constitution day
. congress in 2008 is about to amend the fisa act, for intelligence surveillance act, it governs everything i'm describing to you here. there are debates. senator obama opposes the law but later changes his mind and votes for the amendment to the fisa act. the fisa act not only legitimate did everything president bush had told -- almost everything president bush had told me to do under the article to authorities as commander-in-chief, but in fact gave the national security agency a great deal more authority to do these kind of things. sorry, that is a long involved segue to come back to the point as contentious as the was, as bitter as the fighting law in 2005, when the story broke, legislation was passed three years later model the legitimate expenses. why? because frankly i think we've got powerful agreement that we have to do things differently. i made the point of the continuity between the 33rd and 34th president. obviously there are differences, the most primary difference. president obama became president in one promised to close guantanamo is something he was not able to do but he als
into a coherent architecture really is the key. >> you know, as someone who's worked on fisa applications, i understand the restrictions when a fisa is out there like in this particular case with mr. awlaki. i think that may have had maybe something to do as to why -- and there's so much apprehension when you get into the fisa world -- >> uh-huh. >> -- and so many restrictions, legal restrictions that that may have been counterproductive and may have gotten in the way of these department defense employees or officials sharing this information with fort hood which is something the ranking member and i would like to maybe look at jointly as to how we can if we have to reform it or somehow just have some sort of reporting language that would clarify that that can be shared. i can't imagine why if the federal government has this information within its hands, it can't share it with the united states army, the united states military, you know, on one of its bases. to me, that's just incomprehensible. so i thank you for your testimony, and with that i recognize the ranking member. >> thank you, mr.
worked on the fisa applications and i understand the restrictions and in this particular case with mr. awlaki. i think that may have had something to do as to why there has been so and prevention in the fisa world in so many restrictions, legal restrictionn counterproductive and may have gotten in the way of these department of defense employees or officials sharing this information with fort hood which is something the ranking member, i would like to look at jointly as to how if we have reform and order somehow just have some sort of reporting language that would clarify that can be shared. i can imagine why the federal government has this information within its hands and it can't share it with the united states army or the united states military on one of its bases. to me, that is just on in comprehensible so i thank you for your testimony and with that recognize the ranking member. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. leiter, mr. winter has set although the chances would have been less like the in the circumstances in this tragedy at fort hood could indeed occur again today. can you refl
the sort of surveillance that used to be controversial before the fisa amendments act. so you have underlying romney, silence -- real convergence between the candidates that makes him hard to identify the areas he would differentiate himself. >> do you think a president mitt romney would be more likely to detain someone on u.s. soil outside the traditional judicial legal system? >> i think this is a great hypothetical situation in the case of both candidates. obama has basically said, he won't do it, though he does not foreswear the legal authority to do it. he just says he won't. romney, to my knowledge, hasn't said anything like that. as a practical matter, no president after other cases is going to be looking for a test case with which to do that, and soow going to be looking to figure out a way to deal with such a person in the criminal justice system, and so far we have always found one. hypothetically i think romney might contemplate it, but in behavior they're going to act the same. they're going to look at the detainee in front of them and say, can we make a criminal says?
in addition to the prayers that we offer. we can act tomorrow to pass fisa amendments, the foreign intelligence surveillance act amendments, which allow us to respond to the criticism rendered by the 9/11 commission, that is that we did do not enough to connect the dots of intelligence to warn us about that attack and future attacks. the fisa amendments allow us to collect the dots so we can analyze those dots and bring the intelligence to bear so that we can protect our people with the courage and the bravery of those men and women who are in uniform, guided by the intelligence that we collect and we apply. it is as strong a statement we can make this week to ensure that we do not blind our eyes to that which is out there that may threaten us. let us work together in a bipartisan basis to pass that and let us give those things, those tools that are necessary, to protect us. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which
whether particular individuals with the procedures firms the fisa amendment along with the big ticket case. they have not gone into the detainee case that the supreme court is generally comfortable the way the d.c. circuit to have any indication if the supreme court is comfortable. [applause] >> i want to welcome those who just joined us to center for constitutional studies i want to welcome the c-span audience who are joining us for the lecture. name did not honor of the pittsburg o entrepreneur and industrialist of the kate institute to further the thought of the american founders. for legal scholars sam practicing attorneys with constitutional issues. the first lecture was unconstitutional given by ginsberg of the d.c. circuit. since then and has been subjects ranging from property rights progressivism and is subject of last year's speech which was of the sa of the supreme court review that has just come out and you can get it by going to the qaeda web site. we begin this second decade of the lectures the honorable paul clement as one of the gifted practitioners to appear rick urie befo
search multiple networks. here if i may i would like to make a point about the fisa amendments act, a lou set to expire at the end of this year. as this committee knows this law authorizes the government to collect valuable intelligence voffering international terrorists and other enemies by targeting non-americans who are overseas. these provisions were carefully crafted and carefully implemented to protect the privacy and civil liberties of americans and should remain law. thirdly nctc has enhanced its focus on tactical intelligence and developing leads involving threats to the united states. we established a pursuit group, analysts from across the counterterrorism community, who have unparalleled data access and expertise. their mission is to focus on information that could lead to the discovery of threats, to connect those dots, to identify actionable leads for agencies such as the f.b.i., the department of homeland security, and the c.i.a. finally, nctc provides situational awareness and intelligence support to the broad counterterrorism community. our operation center which is co-lo
, since they said that the fisa amendments, which we passed on this floor with 301 positive votes was the number one priority for the administration in the area of intelligence. in the aftermath of what happened just a couple of weeks ago, one would think that we would understand the seriousness of intelligence. and that which is the greatest tool, according to the d.n.i. currently and previous d.n.i.'s. that tool which got strong bipartisan support was, indeed, an important thing for us to do here. we had three free trade agreements that we finally approved. they have been waiting around for a number of years. the consensus is they create jobs in this economy and give us a fair playing field in which our workers can compete. we had a transportation bill that we passed. we dealt with student loans, the interests paid on student loans and i would say for two years in a row, we have, in fact, spent less on discretionary spending than we did the preceding year. that's the first time we have done that in a generation. there are other things i could talk about. it is a shame that the o
i would like to make a point about the fisa amendments act, a lou set to expire at the end of this year. as this committee knows this law authorizes the government to collect valuable intelligence involving international terrorists and other enemies by targeting non- americans who are overseas. these provisions were carefully crafted and carefully implemented to protect the privacy and civil liberties of americans and should remain law. thirdly nctc has enhanced its focus on tactical intelligence and developing leads involving threats to the united states. we established a pursuit group, analysts from across the counterterrorism community, who have unparalleled data access and expertise. their mission is to focus on information that could lead to the discovery of threats, to connect those dots, to identify actionable leads for agencies such as the f.b.i., the department of homeland security, and the c.i.a. finally, nctc provides situational awareness and intelligence support to the broad counterterrorism community. our operation center which is co-located with the f.b.i. wa
.r. 3949, an act to extend the fisa amendments act of 2008 for five years. mr. durbin: i now ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the title of the bill will be read again on the second legislative day. mr. durbin: i ask unanimous consent when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2:00 p.m. on monday, september 17, 2012, for a pro forma session. that following that, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, september 19, 2012. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning business be deemed expired and the time reserved for their use later in the day. that the majority leader be recognized and following the remarks of the two leaders, the senate resume consideration of s., the veteran jobs corps act. the motion to waive the budget act with respect to the substitute amendment, the majority leader, be recognized. following his remarks, the senate recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus mee
turns to d bait on extending the electronic surveillance law called fisa for two years. last votes this afternoon at 5:00. we will have live house coverage at noon here on c-span. next up we are going to take you to the white house just a short while ago, the president accompanied by secretary of state hillary clinton, came out to make a statement about the death of ambassador chris stevens and foreign service information management shawn smith in benghazi at the consulate there. his comments are about five minutes. >> good morning. every day all across the world american diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation. often they are away from their families. sometimes they brave great danger. yesterday four of these extraordinary americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in benghazi. among those killed was our ambassador, chris stevens as well as foreign service officer shawn smith. we are still notifying the families of the others who were killed. and today the american people stand united in holding the families of the f
't for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: an act to med a the fisa amendments act of 200 for five years. mr. reid: i would object to any further proceedings, madam president. officer objection is heard. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: for months i believe mitt romney wants to be president of all the united states. this week we learned mitt romney only wants to be president of half the united states. if mitt romney were president, he wouldn't waste time worrying about the 47% of americans who he believes are victims, who romney believes are unwilling to take personal responsibility, and those are his words, madam president, not mine. he'll only worry about how the other half lives, i guess. that's what mitt romney told a group of wealthy donors at a closed-door fund-raiser in florida a month or so ago. but it turns out it wasn't closed. someone video taped every word he said to his wealthy donors. but this is, among other things, what he said. this is a quote. "there are 47% who are depende
multiple networks. here if i may i would like to make a point about the fisa amendments act, a lou set to expire at the end of this year. as this committee knows this law authorizes the government to collect valuable intelligence involving international terrorists and other enemies by targeting non-americans who are overseas. these provisions were carefully crafted and carefully implemented to protect the privacy and civil liberties of americans and should remain law. thirdly nctc has enhanced its focus on tactical intelligence and developing leads involving threats to the united states. we established a pursuit group, analysts from across the counterterrorism community, who have unparalleled data access and expertise. their mission is to focus on information that could lead to the discovery of threats, to connect those dots, to identify actionable leads for agencies such as the f.b.i., the department of homeland security, and the c.i.a. finally, nctc provides situational awareness and intelligence support to the broad counterterrorism community. our operation center which is co-locate
but it's a standing case relating to a challenge to what's called the fisa amendment act passed in 2008, and was an amendment through a very substantial amount of the foreign intelligence surveillance act passed in 1978, and to understand the standing issue of the stakes at play you have to understand the merits a little bit so let me get into them. >> for those watching on c-span, what is standing? >> the question of whether a party actually has the right to appear in court and to challenge come in this case to challenge the statute. .. just to get to the merits for a minute. it passed in 1978 the aftermath of the expos in the mid 70s about various abuses in the intelligence community and in short it set up the system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to to wiretapping for national security purposes to get intelligence information. this is a way of making sure there was a court that had a check and a role in reviewing the government's efforts for wiretapping which was used in the past when there haven't been any cour
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)